:00:38. > :00:46.morning, folks, welcome to the Sunday Politics. Rising flood water,
:00:47. > :00:50.a battered coastline, the winter storms forced the Government to take
:00:51. > :00:56.control. Is it hanging the Environment Agency out to dry?
:00:57. > :00:59.Embarrassment for the Government is the Immigration Minister resigns
:01:00. > :01:04.after he discovered he was employing a cleaner with no right to work here
:01:05. > :01:09.for seven years. Ed Miliband promised an end to what he called
:01:10. > :01:16.the machine politics of union fixes in the Labour Party,
:01:17. > :01:22.Coming up on the Sunday Politics in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire,
:01:23. > :01:24.no`frills. Should more than councils copy this London Borough by
:01:25. > :01:25.following the lead of budget airlines?
:01:26. > :01:36.Boris Johnson will be talking to ask about strife on the Underground All
:01:37. > :01:42.of that and after a week of very public coalition spats can David
:01:43. > :01:47.Cameron and Nick Clegg keep the coalition show on the road? Two
:01:48. > :01:52.senior party figures will go head to head. And with me, Helen Lewis, Nick
:01:53. > :01:57.Watt and Iain Martin who would not know they Somerset Levels from their
:01:58. > :02:02.Norfolk Broads, but that will not stop them tweeting their thoughts.
:02:03. > :02:08.We start with the strange Case of the Immigration Minister, his
:02:09. > :02:12.cleaner and some lost documents Yesterday Mark Harper tendered his
:02:13. > :02:15.resignation, telling the media he had discovered the cleaner who
:02:16. > :02:20.worked for him for seven years did not have the right to work in the
:02:21. > :02:25.UK. The Communities Secretary Eric Pickles said he had done the
:02:26. > :02:30.honourable thing. I was sad to see him go, he was a strong minister.
:02:31. > :02:37.Had he been a member of the public he would not have done anything
:02:38. > :02:41.wrong, but he set himself a very high standard and he felt that
:02:42. > :02:46.standard and honourably stood down. This would seem like a good
:02:47. > :02:50.resignation, maybe unlike the Baroness Scotland one years ago on a
:02:51. > :02:57.similar issue, but have we been told the full story? We wait to see that.
:02:58. > :03:02.Labour have picked up saying he is an honourable man, that the reason
:03:03. > :03:06.why he resigned is these very owners checks that landlords and employers
:03:07. > :03:13.will have to perform on employees over their documentation. The most
:03:14. > :03:16.interesting line is that, we do not require them to be experts or spot
:03:17. > :03:23.anything other than an obvious forgery. The suggestion that there
:03:24. > :03:29.is the document he was presented with originality, which he lost was
:03:30. > :03:34.on home office paper and was perhaps not entirely accurate. That is the
:03:35. > :03:38.embarrassment. He is the minister putting through a bill that will
:03:39. > :03:43.demand tougher checks on people and he himself did not do enough checks
:03:44. > :03:47.to discover she was illegal. There is an odd bit where he involves the
:03:48. > :03:53.home office later to check her out as well. He writes a resignation
:03:54. > :03:58.letter and he has to hold himself to pay higher standard. He has done the
:03:59. > :04:03.David Laws approach to this, resign quickly and he can come back. David
:04:04. > :04:12.Cameron wants him to return swiftly to the frontbenchers. He is a state
:04:13. > :04:20.school educated lad. He is the kind of Tory that the Tories are in short
:04:21. > :04:24.supply of. He is a rising star. I would caution on this idea that it
:04:25. > :04:30.is customary that whenever anyone resigns, it is always thought they
:04:31. > :04:35.will come straight back into office. If only the outside world worked
:04:36. > :04:39.like that. It is not, in a company if the HR person resigns, he is such
:04:40. > :04:47.a great chap he will be back next week. There is a silver lining for
:04:48. > :04:53.David Cameron is he has been able to move Harriet Bond up as he moves
:04:54. > :05:00.everyone up. But nobody will see her in the whips office because she is
:05:01. > :05:06.not allowed to appear on television. And if you three want to resign Do
:05:07. > :05:13.not hate you are coming back next week. But we will do it with honour.
:05:14. > :05:17.It has been a hellish week for residents of coastal areas with more
:05:18. > :05:21.storms bringing more flooding and after Prince Charles visited the
:05:22. > :05:24.Somerset Levels on Tuesday the Government has been keen to show it
:05:25. > :05:32.has got a grip on the situation at last.
:05:33. > :05:36.For last weekend's Sunday Politics I made the watery journey to the
:05:37. > :05:43.village of Muchelney, cut off for a whole month. Now everyone has been
:05:44. > :05:49.dropping in. First it was Prince Charles on a park bench pulled by a
:05:50. > :06:02.tractor. He waded into the row about how the floods have been handled.
:06:03. > :06:08.Next it was the chair of the Environment Agency, Lord Smith, who
:06:09. > :06:14.faced angry residents. Sought the river is out. That is precisely what
:06:15. > :06:18.we are going to do. Where he faced, a resident, he did not need that
:06:19. > :06:25.many. David Cameron went for a look as well and gave the region what it
:06:26. > :06:30.wanted, more pumps, more money and in the long-term the return of
:06:31. > :06:35.dredging. There are lessons to learn. The pause in bridging that
:06:36. > :06:39.took place from the late 1990s was wrong and we need to get dredging
:06:40. > :06:44.again. When the water levels come down and it is safe to dredge, we
:06:45. > :06:50.will dredging to make sure these rivers and stitches can carry a
:06:51. > :06:54.better capacity. The Environment Secretary Owen Paterson has not been
:06:55. > :06:59.seen again because he is recovering from emergency eye surgery. In the
:07:00. > :07:07.meantime the floodwaters rose ever higher. Some residents were told to
:07:08. > :07:12.evacuate. In Devon the railway was washed away by the waves leaving a
:07:13. > :07:15.big gap in the network. Look at the weather this weekend. If you can
:07:16. > :07:21.believe it, the storms keep rolling in. What is the long-term solution
:07:22. > :07:27.for flood prone areas of the country? I am joined from Oxford by
:07:28. > :07:34.the editor of The Ecologist magazine, Oliver Tickell, and by
:07:35. > :07:40.local MP Tessa Munt. Tessa, let me come to you first. What do you now
:07:41. > :07:46.want the Government to do? I want it to make sure it does exactly as it
:07:47. > :07:48.promises and delivers what every farmer and landowner around here
:07:49. > :07:54.knows should have been done for years. First, to solve the problems
:07:55. > :07:58.we have right now, but to make sure there is money in the bank for us to
:07:59. > :08:05.carry on doing the maintenance that is necessary. Was it a mistake not
:08:06. > :08:10.to do the dredging? When the waters start to subside does dredging
:08:11. > :08:18.become a key part of this? Yes, of course. It is something the farmers
:08:19. > :08:22.have been asking for four years When you wander along a footpath by
:08:23. > :08:29.a river and you see trees growing and there is 60% of the capacity
:08:30. > :08:35.only because there is silt, it needs to have a pretty dramatic action
:08:36. > :08:41.right now and then we need to make sure the maintenance is ongoing
:08:42. > :08:48.Oliver Tickell, was it a mistake to stop the dredging? If the dredging
:08:49. > :08:53.had happened, the land would not be covered in water for so long?
:08:54. > :08:59.Clearly it is necessary to do at least some dredging on these rivers
:09:00. > :09:03.and in particular because these rivers are well above ground level.
:09:04. > :09:08.They are carrying water that comes down off the hills well above the
:09:09. > :09:15.level of the flood plain on the Somerset Levels. They naturally tend
:09:16. > :09:21.to silt up. But the key thing is that is only a small part of the
:09:22. > :09:26.overall solution. What we need is a catchment wide approach to improve
:09:27. > :09:30.infiltration upstream and you also need to manage the flood plain on
:09:31. > :09:38.the levels and upstream so as to have active flood plain that can
:09:39. > :09:42.store water. This idea it is just about dredging is erroneous.
:09:43. > :09:48.Dredging is a part of it, but it is a catchment wide solution. Dredging
:09:49. > :09:56.is only a small part of the solution he says. Yes, of course it is. But
:09:57. > :10:01.look here. With the farmer is locally, the landowners, they know
:10:02. > :10:06.this land will carry water for a few weeks of the year, that is not a
:10:07. > :10:11.problem. But this water has to be taken away and there is a very good
:10:12. > :10:15.system of drainage and it works perfectly well. In my area there are
:10:16. > :10:20.serious problems because the dredging has not taken place. There
:10:21. > :10:27.are lunatic regulations around were when they do do some of dredging,
:10:28. > :10:32.the Environment Agency is asked to take it away because it is
:10:33. > :10:37.considered toxic waste. This is barmy. We need to take the stuff out
:10:38. > :10:43.of the rivers and build the banks up so we create protection in the
:10:44. > :10:48.future. We have to make sure the dredging is done but make sure the
:10:49. > :10:54.drainage works well and we have pumps in places and we have
:10:55. > :11:02.floodgates put onto the rivers. We need to make sure repairs are done
:11:03. > :11:07.more quickly. All right, let me go back to Oliver Tickell. Is it not
:11:08. > :11:11.the case a lot of people on your side of the argument would like to
:11:12. > :11:16.see lands like the Somerset Levels return to natural habitat? Looe I
:11:17. > :11:21.would like a degree of that, but that does not mean the whole place
:11:22. > :11:30.needs to turn into wilderness so it will remain agricultural landscape.
:11:31. > :11:37.Everybody, all the interested parties who signed up to a document
:11:38. > :11:40.called vision 2034 the Somerset Levels envisages most of the area of
:11:41. > :11:46.the Somerset Levels being turned over to extensive grassland and that
:11:47. > :11:53.is what it is best suited for. Let me put that to Tessa Munt. Have you
:11:54. > :12:01.signed up to this where you will end up with extensive grassland? I have
:12:02. > :12:06.seen it, but grass does not grow if water is sitting on this land for
:12:07. > :12:12.weeks and weeks. What you have to remember is a lot of the levels are
:12:13. > :12:15.managed very carefully and they are conservation land and that means
:12:16. > :12:22.cattle are allowed to go out at certain times of the year and in
:12:23. > :12:30.certain numbers. It is well managed. Do you accept it should return to
:12:31. > :12:35.grassland? Grassland, fine, but you cannot call land grassland in the
:12:36. > :12:39.flipping water is on it so long that nothing grows. It is no good at
:12:40. > :12:46.doing that. You have got to make sure it is managed properly.
:12:47. > :12:52.Drainage has been taking place on this land for centuries. It is the
:12:53. > :12:56.case the system is there, but it needs to be maintained properly and
:12:57. > :13:01.we have to have fewer ridiculous regulations that stop action. Last
:13:02. > :13:06.year the flooding minister agreed dredging should take place and
:13:07. > :13:10.everything stopped. Now we have got the promise from the Prime Minister
:13:11. > :13:14.and I thank Prince Charles for that. Is it not time to let the local
:13:15. > :13:18.people run their land rather than being told what to do by the
:13:19. > :13:25.Environment Agency, central Government and the European Union?
:13:26. > :13:31.The internal drainage boards have considerable power in all of this.
:13:32. > :13:35.They wanted to dredge and they were not allowed to. The farmers want to
:13:36. > :13:42.dredge that is what is going to happen, but they have signed up to a
:13:43. > :13:45.comprehensive vision of catchment management and of environmental
:13:46. > :13:51.improvement turning the Somerset Levels into a world-class haven for
:13:52. > :13:56.wildlife. It is not much good if your house is underwater. The
:13:57. > :14:01.farmers themselves, the RSPB, the drainage boards, they have all
:14:02. > :14:06.signed up to this. The real question now is how do we implement that
:14:07. > :14:15.vision? You give the money to the drainage boards. At the moment they
:14:16. > :14:19.pay 27% of their money and have been doing so for years and years and
:14:20. > :14:23.this is farmers' money and it has been going to the drainage boards
:14:24. > :14:28.and they pay the Environment Agency who are meant to be dredging and
:14:29. > :14:33.that has not happened. We have to leave it there. We have run out of
:14:34. > :14:37.time. Last week saw the Labour Party
:14:38. > :14:41.adopts an historic change with its relationship with the unions.
:14:42. > :14:47.Changes to the rules that propelled Ed Miliband to the top. Ed Miliband
:14:48. > :14:52.was elected Labour leader in 20 0 by the electoral college system which
:14:53. > :14:56.gives unions, party members and MPs one third of votes each. This would
:14:57. > :15:01.be changed into a simpler one member, one vote system. A union
:15:02. > :15:07.member would have to become an affiliated member of the party. They
:15:08. > :15:15.would have to opt in and pay ?3 a year. But the unions would have 50%
:15:16. > :15:19.of the vote at the conference and around one third of the seats on the
:15:20. > :15:23.National executive committee. The proposals are a financial gamble as
:15:24. > :15:28.well. It is estimated the party could face a drop in funding of up
:15:29. > :15:34.to ?5 million a year when the changes are fully implemented in
:15:35. > :15:38.five years. The leader of the Unite trade union has welcomed the report
:15:39. > :15:46.saying it is music to his ears. The package will be voted on at a
:15:47. > :15:48.special one of conference in March. And the Shadow Business Secretary
:15:49. > :15:58.Chuka Umunna joins me now for the Sunday Interview. Welcome back. In
:15:59. > :16:02.what way will the unions have less power and influence in the Labour
:16:03. > :16:06.Party? This is about ensuring individual trade union members have
:16:07. > :16:12.a direct relationship with the Labour Party. At the moment the
:16:13. > :16:16.monies that come to us are decided at a top level, the general
:16:17. > :16:22.secretaries determine this, whether the individual members want us to be
:16:23. > :16:27.in receipt of those monies or not so we are going to change that so that
:16:28. > :16:31.affiliation fees follow the consent of individual members. Secondly we
:16:32. > :16:39.want to make sure the individual trade union members, people who
:16:40. > :16:48.teach our children, power via - fantastic British businesses, we
:16:49. > :16:52.want them to make an active choice, and we are also recognising that in
:16:53. > :17:00.this day and age not everybody wants to become a member of a political
:17:01. > :17:06.party. We haven't got much time The unions still have 50% of the vote at
:17:07. > :17:22.Labour conferences, there will be the single most important vote, more
:17:23. > :17:33.member -- union members will vote than nonunion members, their power
:17:34. > :17:41.has not diminished at all, has it? In relation to the other parts of
:17:42. > :17:44.the group of people who will be voting in a future leadership
:17:45. > :17:50.contest, we are seeking to move towards more of a one member, one
:17:51. > :17:57.vote process. At the moment we have the absurd situation where I, as a
:17:58. > :18:05.member of Parliament, my vote will count for 1000. MPs are losing. .
:18:06. > :18:12.They still have a lot of power. I am a member of the GMB union and the
:18:13. > :18:16.Unite union, also a member of the Fabians as well so I get free votes
:18:17. > :18:20.on top of my vote as a member of Parliament. We are moving to a
:18:21. > :18:25.system where I will have one vote and that is an important part of
:18:26. > :18:30.this. You asked how many people would be casting their votes. The
:18:31. > :18:36.old system, up to 2.8 million ballot papers were sent out with prepaid
:18:37. > :18:46.envelopes for people to return their papers were sent out with prepaid
:18:47. > :18:51.turnout. The idea that you are going to see a big change... Even if
:18:52. > :19:04.your individual party members. In one vital way, your purse strings,
:19:05. > :19:05.your individual party members. In the unions will be more powerful
:19:06. > :19:16.than ever because at the moment they have to hand over 8 million to
:19:17. > :19:18.than ever because at the moment they fraction of that now. They will get
:19:19. > :19:28.to keep that money, but then come the election you go to them and give
:19:29. > :19:35.them a lot of money -- and they will have you then. They won't have us,
:19:36. > :19:39.as you put it! The idea that individual trade union members don't
:19:40. > :19:44.have their own view, their own voice, and just do what their
:19:45. > :19:48.general secretaries do is absurd. They will make their own decision,
:19:49. > :19:54.and we want them to make that and not have their leadership decide
:19:55. > :19:59.that for them. Let me go to the money. The Labour Party manifesto
:20:00. > :20:06.will be reflecting the interests of Britain, and the idea that somehow
:20:07. > :20:10.people can say we are not going to give you this money unless you do
:20:11. > :20:14.this or that, we will give you a policy agenda which is appropriate
:20:15. > :20:19.for the British people, regardless of what implications that may have
:20:20. > :20:24.financially. They will have more seats than anybody else in the NEC
:20:25. > :20:30.and they will hold the purse strings. They will be the
:20:31. > :20:35.determining factor. They won't be. Unite is advocating a 70% rate of
:20:36. > :20:43.income tax, there is no way we will have that in our manifesto. Unite is
:20:44. > :20:56.advocating taking back contracts and no compensation basis, we would not
:20:57. > :21:07.-- there is no way we would do that. How many chief executives of the
:21:08. > :21:15.FTSE 100 are backing Labour? We have lots of chief executives backing
:21:16. > :21:18.Labour. I don't know the exact number. Ed Miliband has just placed
:21:19. > :21:30.an important business person in the House of Lords, the former chief
:21:31. > :21:39.executive of the ITV, Bill Grimsey. How many? You can only name one
:21:40. > :21:45.Bill Grimsey, there is also John Mills. Anyone who is currently
:21:46. > :21:49.chairman of the chief executive With the greatest respect, you are
:21:50. > :21:54.talking about less than half the percent of business leaders in our
:21:55. > :22:01.country, we have almost 5 million businesses, not all FTSE 100
:22:02. > :22:07.businesses, not all listed, and we are trying to get people from across
:22:08. > :22:22.the country of all different shapes and sizes. Let's widen it to the
:22:23. > :22:28.FTSE 250. That is 250 out of 5 million companies. The largest ones,
:22:29. > :22:32.they make the profits and provide the jobs. Two thirds of private
:22:33. > :22:37.sector jobs in this country come from small and medium-sized
:22:38. > :22:40.businesses, and small and medium-sized businesses are an
:22:41. > :22:51.important part of a large companies supply chains. So you cannot name a
:22:52. > :22:58.single chairman from the FTSE 2 0, correct? I don't know all the
:22:59. > :23:09.chairman. Are you going to fight the next election without a single boss
:23:10. > :23:12.of a FTSE 250 company? I have named some important business people, but
:23:13. > :23:22.the most important thing is that we are not coming out with a manifesto
:23:23. > :23:32.for particular interests, but for broader interest. Let me show you,
:23:33. > :23:46.Digby Jones says Labour's policy is, "if it creates wealth, let's kick
:23:47. > :23:53.it" . Another quote, that it borders on predatory taxation. They think
:23:54. > :23:59.you are anti-business. I don't agree with them. One of the interesting
:24:00. > :24:03.things about Sir Stuart's comments on the predatory taxation and I
:24:04. > :24:07.think he was referring to the 5 p rate of tax is that he made some
:24:08. > :24:14.comments arguing against the reduction of the top rate of tax
:24:15. > :24:17.from 50p. He is saying something different now. Digby of course has
:24:18. > :24:23.his own opinions, he has never been a member of the Labour Party. Let me
:24:24. > :24:27.come onto this business of the top rate of tax, do you accept or don't
:24:28. > :24:32.you that there is a point when higher rates of income tax become
:24:33. > :24:38.counter-productive? Ultimately you want to have the lowest tax rates
:24:39. > :24:43.possible. Do you accept there is a certain level you actually get less
:24:44. > :24:49.money? I think ultimately there is a level beyond you could go which
:24:50. > :24:54.would be counter-productive, for example the 75% rate of tax I
:24:55. > :25:07.mentioned earlier, being advocated by Unite in France. Most French
:25:08. > :25:15.higher earners will pay less tax than under your plans. I beg your
:25:16. > :25:21.pardon, with the 50p? Under your proposals, people here will pay more
:25:22. > :25:27.tax than French higher earners. If you are asking if in terms of the
:25:28. > :25:33.level, you asked the question and I answered it, do I think if you reach
:25:34. > :25:38.a level beyond which the tax burden becomes counter-productive, can I
:25:39. > :25:42.give you a number what that would be, I cannot but let me explain -
:25:43. > :25:49.the reason we have sought to increase its two 50p is that we can
:25:50. > :25:53.get in revenue to reduce the deficit. In an ideal world you
:25:54. > :25:56.wouldn't need a 50p rate of tax which is why during our time in
:25:57. > :26:07.office we didn't have one, because we didn't have those issues. Sure,
:26:08. > :26:13.though you cannot tell me how much the 50p will raise. In the three
:26:14. > :26:22.years of operation we think it raised ?10 billion. You think. That
:26:23. > :26:26.was based on extrapolation from the British library. It is at least
:26:27. > :26:32.possible I would suggest, for the sake of argument, that when you
:26:33. > :26:38.promise to take over half people's income, which is what you will do if
:26:39. > :26:49.you get your way, the richest 1 currently account for 70 5% of all
:26:50. > :26:56.tax revenues. -- 75%. Is it not a danger that if you take more out of
:26:57. > :27:05.them, they will just go? I don't think so, we are talking about the
:27:06. > :27:08.top 1% here. If you look at the directors of sub 5 million turnover
:27:09. > :27:23.companies, the average managing director of that gets around
:27:24. > :27:32.?87,000. Let me narrow it down to something else. Let's take the .1%
:27:33. > :27:38.of top taxpayers, down to fewer than 30,000 people. They account for over
:27:39. > :27:43.14% of all of the income tax revenues. Only 29,000 people. If
:27:44. > :27:50.they go because you are going to take over half their income, you
:27:51. > :27:57.have lost a huge chunk of your tax base. They could easily go, at
:27:58. > :28:01.tipping point they could go. What we are advocating here is not
:28:02. > :28:06.controversial. Those with the broadest shoulders, it is not
:28:07. > :28:16.unreasonable to ask them to share the heavier burden. Can you name one
:28:17. > :28:24.other major economy that subscribes to this? Across Europe, for example
:28:25. > :28:31.in Sweden they have higher tax rates than us. Can you name one major
:28:32. > :28:37.economy? I couldn't pluck one out of the air, I can see where you are
:28:38. > :28:41.coming from, I don't agree with it. I think most people subscribe to the
:28:42. > :28:49.fact that those with wider shoulders should carry the heavy a burden We
:28:50. > :28:52.have run out of time but thank you for being here.
:28:53. > :28:57.Over the past week it seems that Nick Clegg has activated a new Lib
:28:58. > :29:00.Dem strategy - 'Get Gove'. After a very public spat over who should
:29:01. > :29:03.head up the schools inspection service Ofsted, Lib Dem sources have
:29:04. > :29:06.continued to needle away at the Education Secretary. And other
:29:07. > :29:30.senior Lib Dems have also taken aim at their coalition partners. Here's
:29:31. > :29:33.Giles Dilnot. It's unlikely the polite welcome of these school
:29:34. > :29:36.children to Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg and his party colleague
:29:37. > :29:38.schools minister David Laws would be so forthcoming right now from the
:29:39. > :29:41.man in charge of schools Conservative Michael Gove. Mr Laws
:29:42. > :29:44.is said to have been furious with The Education secretary over the
:29:45. > :29:47.decision to remove Sally Morgan as chair of Ofsted. But those who know
:29:48. > :29:50.the inner working of the Lib Dems say that's just understandable. When
:29:51. > :29:53.you have the department not being consulted, it would be possible for
:29:54. > :29:56.him to not publicly comment. The remarkable thing would be if he
:29:57. > :30:07.hadn't said anything at all. We should be careful to understand this
:30:08. > :30:17.is not always part of a preplanned decision. There is a growing sense
:30:18. > :30:21.that inside Number Ten this is a concerted Lib Dem strategy, we also
:30:22. > :30:25.understand there is no love lost between Nick Clegg and Michael Gove
:30:26. > :30:31.to say the least, and a growing frustration that if the Lib Dems
:30:32. > :30:34.think such so-called yellow and blue attacks can help them with the
:30:35. > :30:42.election, they can also damage the long-term prospects of the Coalition
:30:43. > :30:45.post 2015. One spat does not a divorce make but perhaps even more
:30:46. > :30:47.significant has been Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander s
:30:48. > :30:50.recent newspaper interview firmly spiking any room for George Osborne
:30:51. > :30:53.to manoeuvre on lowering the highest income tax rate to 40p. All this
:30:54. > :30:56.builds on the inclusion in Government at the reshuffle of
:30:57. > :30:59.people like Norman Baker at the Home Office and Simon Hughes at Justice
:31:00. > :31:01.people who are happier to publically express doubt on Conservative
:31:02. > :31:14.policy, unlike say Jeremy Browne who was removed and who has made plain
:31:15. > :31:18.his views on Coalition. It is difficult for us to demonstrate that
:31:19. > :31:27.we are more socialist than an Ed Miliband Labour led party. Even if
:31:28. > :31:33.we did wish to demonstrate it, doing it in coalition with the
:31:34. > :31:37.Conservatives would be harder still. Nonetheless a differentiation
:31:38. > :31:43.strategy was always likely as 2 15 approached, so is there evidence it
:31:44. > :31:47.works? Or of the work we publish shows the Lib Dems have a huge
:31:48. > :31:52.problem in terms of their distinctiveness, so attacking their
:31:53. > :31:55.coalition partners or the Labour Party is helpful in showing what
:31:56. > :32:01.they are against, but there are bigger problem is showing what they
:32:02. > :32:06.are for. And one Conservative MP with access to Number Ten as part of
:32:07. > :32:11.the PM's policy board says yellow on blue attacks are misplaced and
:32:12. > :32:16.irresponsible. At this stage when all the hard work is being done and
:32:17. > :32:24.the country is back on its feet the Lib Dems are choosing the time to
:32:25. > :32:28.step away from the coalition. That is your position, but do you suspect
:32:29. > :32:35.coming up to the next election we will see more of this? I think the
:32:36. > :32:41.Lib Dems are about as hard to pin down as a weasel in Vaseline. And
:32:42. > :32:44.with the public's view of politicians right now, and wants to
:32:45. > :32:51.be seen as slicker than a well oiled weasel? And we have Lib Dem peer
:32:52. > :33:01.Matthew Oakeshott and senior Conservative backbencher Bernard
:33:02. > :33:05.Jenkin. Matthew, the Lib Dems are now picking fights with the Tories
:33:06. > :33:10.on a range of issues, some of them trivial. Is this a Pirelli used to
:33:11. > :33:18.Lib Dem withdrawal from the coalition? I do not know, I am not
:33:19. > :33:22.privy to Nick Clegg's in strategy. Some of us have been independent for
:33:23. > :33:28.some time. I resigned over treatment of the banks. That is now being
:33:29. > :33:34.sorted out. But what is significant is we have seen a string of attacks,
:33:35. > :33:40.almost an enemy within strategy When you have Nick Clegg, David Laws
:33:41. > :33:47.and Danny Alexander, the three key people closest to the Conservatives,
:33:48. > :33:50.when you see all of them attacking, and this morning Nick Clegg has had
:33:51. > :33:55.a go at the Conservatives over drug policy. There is a string of
:33:56. > :34:02.policies where something is going on. It is difficult to do an enemy
:34:03. > :34:08.within strategy. I believe as many Lib Dems do that we should withdraw
:34:09. > :34:11.from the coalition six months to one year before the election so we can
:34:12. > :34:16.put our positive policies across rather than having this tricky
:34:17. > :34:24.strategy of trying to do it from within. Why does David Cameron need
:34:25. > :34:29.the Lib Dems? He probably does not. The country generally favoured the
:34:30. > :34:32.coalition to start with. Voters like to see politicians are working
:34:33. > :34:38.together and far more of that goes on in Westminster then we see. Most
:34:39. > :34:46.of my committee reports are unanimous reports from all parties.
:34:47. > :34:54.Why does he need them? I do not think he does. You would be happy to
:34:55. > :34:58.see the Lib Dems go? I would always be happy to see a single minority
:34:59. > :35:03.Government because it would be easier for legislation. The
:35:04. > :35:07.legislation you could not get through would not get through
:35:08. > :35:12.whether we were in coalition or not. The 40p tax rate, there
:35:13. > :35:16.probably is not a majority in the House of Commons at the moment,
:35:17. > :35:21.despite what Nick Clegg originally said. It does not make much
:35:22. > :35:25.difference. What makes a difference from the perspective of the
:35:26. > :35:30.committee I chair is historically we have had single party Government
:35:31. > :35:34.that have collective responsibility and clarity. The reason that is
:35:35. > :35:39.important is because nothing gets done if everybody is at sixes and
:35:40. > :35:44.sevens in the Government. Everything stops, there is paralysis as the row
:35:45. > :35:49.goes on. Civil servants do not know who they are working for. If it
:35:50. > :35:56.carries on getting fractures, there is a bigger argument to get out. If
:35:57. > :36:01.it continues at this level of intensity of the enemy within
:36:02. > :36:06.strategy as you have described it, can the coalition survived another
:36:07. > :36:10.16 months of this? It is also a question should they. I never
:36:11. > :36:17.thought I would say this, I agree with Bernard. Interestingly earlier
:36:18. > :36:21.Chuka Umunna missed the point talking about business support.
:36:22. > :36:24.Business is worried about this anti-European rhetoric and that is a
:36:25. > :36:28.deep split between the Liberal Democrats and the UKIP wing of the
:36:29. > :36:34.Tory party. That is really damaging and that is something we need to
:36:35. > :36:39.make our own case separately on. Do you get fed up when you hear
:36:40. > :36:43.constant Lib Dem attacks on you? What makes me fed up is my own party
:36:44. > :36:50.cannot respond in kind because we are in coalition. I would love to
:36:51. > :36:57.have this much more open debate. I would like to see my own party
:36:58. > :36:59.leader, for example as he did in the House of Commons, it was the Liberal
:37:00. > :37:04.Democrats who blocked the referendum on the house of lords and if we want
:37:05. > :37:08.to get this bill through it should be a Government bill. We know we can
:37:09. > :37:12.get it through the Commons, but we need to get the Liberals out of the
:37:13. > :37:16.Government so they stop blocking the Government putting forward a
:37:17. > :37:26.referendum bill. And put millions of jobs at risk? I am not going down
:37:27. > :37:30.the European road today. It strikes me that given that the attacks from
:37:31. > :37:35.the Lib Dems are now coming from the left attacking the Tories, is this a
:37:36. > :37:40.representative of the failure of Nick Clegg's strategy to rebuild a
:37:41. > :37:46.centrist Liberal party and he now accepts the only way he can save as
:37:47. > :37:52.many seats as he can do is to get the disillusioned left Lib Dem
:37:53. > :37:56.voters to come back to the fold? The site is we have lost over half our
:37:57. > :38:01.vote at the last election and at the moment there is no sign in the polls
:38:02. > :38:07.of it coming back and we are getting very close to the next election. I
:38:08. > :38:13.welcome it if Nick Clegg is starting to address that problem, but talking
:38:14. > :38:17.about the centre is not the answer. Most Liberal Democrat voters at the
:38:18. > :38:22.last election are radical, progressive people who want to see a
:38:23. > :38:25.much fairer Britain and a much less divided society and we must make
:38:26. > :38:32.sure we maximise our vote from there. We know what both of you
:38:33. > :38:36.want, but what do you think will happen? Do you think this coalition
:38:37. > :38:42.will survive all the way to the election or will it break up
:38:43. > :38:48.beforehand? I think it will break up beforehand. Our long-term economic
:38:49. > :38:51.plan is working. The further changes in policies we want to implement to
:38:52. > :38:58.sustain that plan are being held back by the Liberal Democrats. When
:38:59. > :39:02.will they break up? It has lasted longer than I thought it would, but
:39:03. > :39:10.it must break up at least six months before the election. Do you think it
:39:11. > :39:14.will survive or not? The coalition has delivered a great deal in many
:39:15. > :39:19.ways, but it is running out of steam. It depends what happens in
:39:20. > :39:23.the May elections. If the Liberal Democrats do not do better than we
:39:24. > :39:32.have done in the last three, there will be very strong pressure from
:39:33. > :39:37.the inside. You both agree. Television history has been made.
:39:38. > :39:42.You are watching the Sunday Politics. Coming up: I will be
:39:43. > :39:52.looking at Hello, you're watching Sunday
:39:53. > :39:57.Politics for Yorkshire and Lincolnshire. Coming up, no frills.
:39:58. > :40:00.Should more than councils copy this London Borough by following the lead
:40:01. > :40:08.of budget airlines in delivering services?
:40:09. > :40:11.And, as more council services are outsourced, we find out why some
:40:12. > :40:16.Yorkshire care workers claim they are facing drastic pay cuts. First,
:40:17. > :40:21.though, let's say hello to our guests. Sarah Champion is the Labour
:40:22. > :40:28.MP for Rotherham, and Simon Reevell is the Conservative MP for Dewsbury.
:40:29. > :40:33.Hello to you both. So, town halls are setting their budgets for the
:40:34. > :40:37.coming year, why are so many councils rejecting the government's
:40:38. > :40:42.money to freeze council tax bills? I think they have strings attached to
:40:43. > :40:45.the government money and a lot of councils are afraid. They are being
:40:46. > :40:48.cut to the bone at the moment, trying to protect services and to do
:40:49. > :40:51.the best for their constituents but they have a tough time ahead. Many
:40:52. > :40:57.councils say they cannot afford to freeze bills and carry on delivering
:40:58. > :41:01.services they are supposed to. The countries with councils that are
:41:02. > :41:05.managing to do what is necessary and sensible things with tax. If you are
:41:06. > :41:12.a local authority not doing that, you have got to ask yourself why.
:41:13. > :41:15.So, should councils adopt to no`frills approach to providing
:41:16. > :41:18.services? Some argue that town halls could learn lessons from budget
:41:19. > :41:21.airlines where customers pay for a basic product, but have to dig
:41:22. > :41:25.deeper into their pockets for extra services. The move was pioneered by
:41:26. > :41:36.Barnet Council in London. So could the idea work in the north?
:41:37. > :41:42.Recent years have seen budget airlines pioneer a no`frills
:41:43. > :41:48.approach to travel. So, could the same principle work at your local
:41:49. > :41:54.town Hull? Barnet in North London has been described as the first
:41:55. > :41:56.no`frills council. The move came about five years ago when
:41:57. > :42:00.authorities started to realise they'd be facing a financial
:42:01. > :42:03.squeeze. The idea is something like this. If residents were willing to
:42:04. > :42:12.pay for larger bins or fast`track planning applications, that's what
:42:13. > :42:14.they get. If not, they'd receive the basic service, like anyone else. The
:42:15. > :42:18.Conservative leader of Barnet Council says the model has allowed
:42:19. > :42:25.the authority to cut its budget by a third and this year council tax
:42:26. > :42:29.bills will be reduced by 1%. I don't think people want frills from their
:42:30. > :42:33.council. They just want good, solid service at a reasonable price. And
:42:34. > :42:36.that's what we're doing. We're providing all the social services
:42:37. > :42:41.that we need to provide, and we are doing it well. We started looking at
:42:42. > :42:44.every single activity that we do, seeing if there are things we could
:42:45. > :42:48.stop doing, whether there are things we could do better, or things that
:42:49. > :42:53.we could outsource. And we have outsourced a fair bit of what we do.
:42:54. > :42:57.It's uncomfortable for us to say it but Mr Pickles was right. We could
:42:58. > :43:00.take a third out of the budget and we've done it. Barnet is home to
:43:01. > :43:02.Finchley which was famously represented in Parliament by a
:43:03. > :43:07.Lincolnshire lass called Margaret Thatcher. I suspect she would have
:43:08. > :43:13.approved of the idea of no`frills councils. But what do local
:43:14. > :43:20.residents say? I like Barnet Council. They do offer value for
:43:21. > :43:24.money. They keep the borough clean. Do you get value for money? No!
:43:25. > :43:29.We're always having to put our hands in our pockets to pay extra bills.
:43:30. > :43:32.This is a pretty good place to live and these services are pretty good
:43:33. > :43:35.around here so I'm not going to complain. The local government
:43:36. > :43:44.secretary Eric Pickles believes many town halls could further tighten
:43:45. > :43:47.their belts. So, would the no`frills approach work in somewhere like
:43:48. > :43:50.north`east Lincolnshire, an authority which is proposing to
:43:51. > :43:59.raise council tax by 1.9% to balance the books? Could you become a
:44:00. > :44:02.no`frills council? We are a no`frills council. Mr Pickles wants
:44:03. > :44:06.to come up here and see how it's done right. We are doing everything
:44:07. > :44:10.that Mr Pickles has told us to do. Two years ago when I became leader
:44:11. > :44:15.of this council, I had ?140 million revenue budget. That's the things I
:44:16. > :44:19.spend day`to`day. By the time I get to 2017, I've got a ?67 million
:44:20. > :44:22.revenue budget. It's more than halved, yet I've still got to do
:44:23. > :44:26.everything people expect. That's the nucleus of it. Barnet is Barnet,
:44:27. > :44:31.north`east Lincs is north`east Lincs. I keep inviting Mr Pickles,
:44:32. > :44:35.and he's not replied once. Every time I'm on your programme, I say
:44:36. > :44:40.the same thing. Eric, come and see me. So, the jury's out on whether
:44:41. > :44:50.the no`frills council model could get off the ground elsewhere.
:44:51. > :44:58.Sarah Champion, do you think council tax payers would welcome that
:44:59. > :45:00.no`frills approach? I am sure they'd love to be able to afford it but,
:45:01. > :45:09.unfortunately, Rotherham and Yorkshire is not Barnet, and income
:45:10. > :45:15.levels are lower. And to think you have to pay your taxes and on top
:45:16. > :45:19.for your fundamental services is outrageous. Eric Pickles might love
:45:20. > :45:24.Barnet, but that is not the same income level. We are finding living
:45:25. > :45:28.standards are getting absolutely hammered so to have to lose your
:45:29. > :45:33.services and pay for them again, I cannot accept that. Do people want
:45:34. > :45:36.frills from their councils? It is a bit defeatist. Why wouldn't a
:45:37. > :45:42.council want to look and see whether it can deliver for less? Why would
:45:43. > :45:46.your starting point being no, we don't want to consider that. They
:45:47. > :45:52.have been cut so much already that they would love frills! They are
:45:53. > :45:57.down to nothing. If anybody watching this programme and is not familiar
:45:58. > :46:02.with waste with their counsel, I'd be amazed. In Kirklees, they've
:46:03. > :46:08.spent ?600,000 on a programme that has been declared unlawful. It has
:46:09. > :46:12.been scrapped. There is all sorts of waste. To start from the position of
:46:13. > :46:17.we can't improve anything, that is defeatist. If there are ways of
:46:18. > :46:21.doing it, we all shop around and buy things from different places, so a
:46:22. > :46:27.council can do that so it spends less. What about the people who
:46:28. > :46:32.can't afford to shop around? And, I'm sorry, my counsel and I think
:46:33. > :46:37.virtually all of them in Yorkshire are cutting to the bone at the
:46:38. > :46:40.moment. It is not a question of frills and overspend. They have
:46:41. > :46:44.looked at all of their backroom offices, they've reduced as much as
:46:45. > :46:47.they can and I don't believe there is any waste now. To be losing your
:46:48. > :46:55.vital services and expecting people to pay for them that is ridiculous.
:46:56. > :47:05.That is where we disagree. I think that it is the council that buys its
:47:06. > :47:10.services. We are used to picking and choosing. But saying there is no
:47:11. > :47:14.money to be saved, we wouldn't take that attitude Norman `` in our
:47:15. > :47:19.day`to`day lives so why should the authority? Whether savings are being
:47:20. > :47:23.made is by outsourcing things. The people at the very bottom are having
:47:24. > :47:27.their wages cut, they're having their terms and conditions cut, so
:47:28. > :47:31.you can save money but what is the consequence to the individual? The
:47:32. > :47:35.point is that you do it in a way that is fair. No one is suggesting
:47:36. > :47:41.that you do it in a way that employs people below the minimum wage. All
:47:42. > :47:49.the people that Barnet employee are paid the London living wage. But
:47:50. > :47:53.they are looking at employing people below the living wage. Your
:47:54. > :47:57.suggestion is we don't look at this, my suggestion is let's see if
:47:58. > :48:00.it can be done. If there are savings that can be made fairly, that allow
:48:01. > :48:06.services to be provided properly, why wouldn't you look at that? Do
:48:07. > :48:10.you think people are willing in theory to pay more for better
:48:11. > :48:13.services through the council tax, and why don't more councils, if that
:48:14. > :48:19.is the case, challenge that 2% ceiling and put it to a referendum?
:48:20. > :48:23.I understand the principle of bedroom tax, but the reality is that
:48:24. > :48:27.an awful lot of people do not have any spare money to be able to pay
:48:28. > :48:31.for these additional services. They are paying their taxes already, they
:48:32. > :48:36.are finding it hard to meet end to end. There are food banks
:48:37. > :48:39.proliferating. I feel so much shame there is this going on in our
:48:40. > :48:45.society. I understand what Simon is saying but it is not the reality.
:48:46. > :48:51.Eric Pickles wanted to reduce the cap from 2% to 1%. Would you agree
:48:52. > :48:55.with him? I don't see anything wrong with asking local authorities to do
:48:56. > :48:59.as much as they can to see they spend as little of our money as they
:49:00. > :49:04.have to because local authorities do not have money and governments that
:49:05. > :49:08.have money and it is people who have money and it is how much is taken
:49:09. > :49:13.from them. If a local authority can do something at 1% rather than 2%,
:49:14. > :49:16.why not? We can think of things that have changed over the last few years
:49:17. > :49:23.that are done different key, better and cheaper and we wouldn't go back
:49:24. > :49:26.to how it used to be. We should see how it can be progressed further.
:49:27. > :49:29.Now, to claims that many care workers in Yorkshire are facing
:49:30. > :49:32.drastic pay cuts. Some staff, who provide home support to vulnerable
:49:33. > :49:35.adults, say they could be paid less than supermarket shelf stackers
:49:36. > :49:43.because their jobs have been outsourced to private companies and
:49:44. > :49:47.charities. Len Tingle has the story. We are passionate about health and
:49:48. > :49:52.social care. If you are, too, then come join us and make life more
:49:53. > :49:55.interesting. This is a recruitment video for the award`winning national
:49:56. > :49:58.charity Choice Support. It specialises in helping adults with
:49:59. > :50:02.severe learning disabilities to live relatively independent lives. It's
:50:03. > :50:07.been awarded contracts in many parts of the country to take over teams of
:50:08. > :50:13.NHS or local council staff who used to do this. In West Yorkshire, it
:50:14. > :50:17.now does this work in Wakefield. And it's shocked its 284 workers by
:50:18. > :50:23.telling them it has to drastically cut the wage bill. What we are
:50:24. > :50:25.seeing on the ground is an increasing number of charities and
:50:26. > :50:30.private sector companies picking up contracts from local government. And
:50:31. > :50:37.then decimating terms of conditions to such an extent that the staff are
:50:38. > :50:40.leaving in droves. In a statement, Choice Support confirmed that its
:50:41. > :50:41.Wakefield operation is making losses with its current wage bill and
:50:42. > :50:57.added... At the heart of this issue is how
:50:58. > :51:01.this work is carried out, or, more importantly, how it is paid for. In
:51:02. > :51:07.the past, all of the work was done by NHS staff on NHS terms and
:51:08. > :51:10.conditions. Now responsibility has shifted to local authorities and
:51:11. > :51:14.they are contracting it out. The problem is that budgets for those
:51:15. > :51:18.contracts are not ring`fenced. So that means that the work for these
:51:19. > :51:24.vulnerable people is now right in the middle of council spending cuts.
:51:25. > :51:27.It is definitely becoming an increasingly serious issue,
:51:28. > :51:30.nationally. Because local authorities can't pay very high
:51:31. > :51:35.prices for care services because of the financial environment we are in.
:51:36. > :51:40.And because of the cuts to local government. And, so, actually being
:51:41. > :51:42.able to support what we want to be a very skilled, stable, confident and
:51:43. > :51:52.capable workforce is becoming a pressure, without doubt.
:51:53. > :51:55.Hello, we are Care UK. We are in the business of making lives more
:51:56. > :51:59.fulfilling. Not just the lives of people we care for. We like the
:52:00. > :52:03.people who work with us to be fulfilled, too. It's not just
:52:04. > :52:06.charities who are finding it hard to make the contracts they've been
:52:07. > :52:10.awarded financially viable. This is a promotional video by the big
:52:11. > :52:13.commercial health company Care UK. In Doncaster, it took over a
:52:14. > :52:18.contract from the local council to support 144 vulnerable adults. Staff
:52:19. > :52:22.here have been offered a transitional one off payment if they
:52:23. > :52:27.agree to cut overtime and holiday entitlements. Some of those staff
:52:28. > :52:33.say it will make their take`home pay so low they might have to leave the
:52:34. > :52:38.job. They can go out now and earn more working at Morrisons, stacking
:52:39. > :52:41.shelves... Instead of looking after some of the most vulnerable people
:52:42. > :52:47.in society. We deem that more important, obviously. With this type
:52:48. > :52:50.of group of people with disabilities, it takes years to get
:52:51. > :52:55.trust and understanding of what they want and how they communicate and
:52:56. > :53:00.what their needs are. You can't learn it in two minutes. We learn
:53:01. > :53:03.that over many years. In a statement, Care UK confirmed it is
:53:04. > :53:05.negotiating the wages bill it has inherited from the public sector and
:53:06. > :53:19.added... In both these cases, strike ballot
:53:20. > :53:23.has been held, negotiations are going on. There is a glimmer of
:53:24. > :53:26.hope. In a third case in Bradford, a different provider, a different
:53:27. > :53:31.workforce, a deal has been struck this weekend and the threat of wage
:53:32. > :53:34.cuts has been withdrawn. And it has to be said that among all the
:53:35. > :53:40.upheaval of public spending across the UK, this affects relatively few
:53:41. > :53:48.people. But they are among the most vulnerable.
:53:49. > :53:53.It is a difficult one. Can we realistically expect private
:53:54. > :53:59.companies and charities to offer the same pay and conditions to staff as
:54:00. > :54:04.they had under the NHS? Well, they are getting profit, so that is
:54:05. > :54:08.immediately coming off wages. And people are suffering because of it.
:54:09. > :54:12.What I am interested in is the bigger picture. The most vulnerable
:54:13. > :54:16.people in our society who we care about the most, our young, the
:54:17. > :54:20.disabled, the very old, they should have the best care but wages are
:54:21. > :54:25.being reduced so dramatically that as the lady said it is better for
:54:26. > :54:29.her to be working in Morrisons. What we need is some really well skilled
:54:30. > :54:32.and well supported and motivated staff to look after the most
:54:33. > :54:38.vulnerable people and pay is part of that. Simon Reevell, is it fair to
:54:39. > :54:43.ask people who do these jobs to work on sociable hours and do some
:54:44. > :54:48.terrible shifts to be paid less than people stacking shelves? Maybe not.
:54:49. > :54:52.One of the things that concerns me as well is that the organisations
:54:53. > :54:56.that describe themselves as charities but really have got people
:54:57. > :55:01.running them who are paid directors salaries, if there is an issue about
:55:02. > :55:04.pay, it is important for people who are getting six`figure sums at the
:55:05. > :55:12.head of these organisations to show some leadership. I think it is
:55:13. > :55:15.important to value properly in always what people who look after
:55:16. > :55:20.elderly and vulnerable people actually do and what they actually
:55:21. > :55:23.have to do. I have seen this close`up through family
:55:24. > :55:29.circumstances. It is fantastic the effort people in. If you are running
:55:30. > :55:33.one of these organisations, you need to stop, a little bit like local
:55:34. > :55:37.authorities, stop and make sure that it is being done properly and
:55:38. > :55:44.fairly, and make sure the people you are asking a lot of feel valued.
:55:45. > :55:46.Sarah Champion, many of the unions might be ideological the opposed
:55:47. > :55:51.outsourcing but this is something that started under Labour, and it
:55:52. > :55:56.happens under many Labour councils, doesn't it? Yes, and everyone is
:55:57. > :56:02.looking for ways to make the money go further because it is very tight.
:56:03. > :56:06.So, for me, it is not an ideological problem, for me it is making sure
:56:07. > :56:10.that the workers are resourced properly. It is making sure the
:56:11. > :56:15.people get the best care. We are talking about people in care homes
:56:16. > :56:19.in the future, but I know people who work for agencies who go into homes,
:56:20. > :56:25.and they are on zero hours contracts, they get paid for the 15
:56:26. > :56:29.minutes they are in the home, they don't get paid for the drivetime, so
:56:30. > :56:35.they are on the minimum wage. How can somebody do a good job when they
:56:36. > :56:38.feel so tomorrow lies? So, we have companies, charities, who take on
:56:39. > :56:45.these contracts but say they cannot afford to cover running some, so how
:56:46. > :56:50.does the government get over that? We must be careful not agree with
:56:51. > :56:53.each other too much, but it isn't an ideological thing. There are plenty
:56:54. > :57:00.of companies that do this and do it well. So what we have got to ask
:57:01. > :57:07.ourselves is why don't some be `` white answer able to? If someone is
:57:08. > :57:11.heading for a contract, people need to be absolutely sure they can
:57:12. > :57:15.provide it in terms that can be ongoing, but it isn't a question of
:57:16. > :57:21.coming back after two or three months and saying, we didn't get our
:57:22. > :57:25.maths right. Local authorities are quite right to shop around. They
:57:26. > :57:28.need to talk to charities and companies and they need to make
:57:29. > :57:32.sure, as we all do on a day`to`day basis, that they are buying from
:57:33. > :57:36.someone they trust. That is why I would rather it stayed with the
:57:37. > :57:40.local authority because I want the safeguards in place, I want the
:57:41. > :57:47.monitoring in place. Now, strike action, do you support that? I can
:57:48. > :57:52.completely see why they feel so frustrated that they don't know what
:57:53. > :57:54.to do. Do you think they are right? It is up to them to make that
:57:55. > :57:58.decision. Now, let's get some more of the
:57:59. > :58:06.week's political news in our part of the world. Louise Martin has our
:58:07. > :58:09.round`up in 60 seconds. Disgraced former Rotherham MP Denis
:58:10. > :58:11.MacShane was released from prison on Friday after being jailed for
:58:12. > :58:17.defrauding ?13,000 in Parliamentary expenses. He said on Twitter he had
:58:18. > :58:23.spent six fascinating, humbling weeks in prison.
:58:24. > :58:26.After last week's deselection of Thirsk and Malton MP Anne McIntosh,
:58:27. > :58:33.Labour's taunted the government over the number of Conservative women
:58:34. > :58:36.MPs. David Cameron, however, trumpeted the appointment of four
:58:37. > :58:40.new Tory women frontbenchers. The bill to repair potholes on roads
:58:41. > :58:44.in East Yorkshire and Lincolnshire will run into hundreds of millions
:58:45. > :58:47.of pounds. One councillor warns that will only increase if councils fail
:58:48. > :58:52.to adopt more creative ways of prevention.
:58:53. > :58:55.And Scarborough and Whitby MP and Transport Minister Robert Goodwill
:58:56. > :59:00.revealed to the Commons a personal reason for backing a ban on smoking
:59:01. > :59:04.in cars. Having at a young age having to sit in the back of the car
:59:05. > :59:11.feeling green and carsick while my father was puffing away...
:59:12. > :59:18.We have all been there. So, tomorrow, the Commons will have a
:59:19. > :59:22.free vote on a ban on smoking in cars where children are present.
:59:23. > :59:27.Supported by labour, so no prizes for guessing how you will vote.
:59:28. > :59:30.Personally, I am absolutely supportive of this. On Friday I was
:59:31. > :59:34.with a class of seven`year`olds and I asked them their opinion and
:59:35. > :59:38.absolutely everyone of them said it should be banned. I am listening to
:59:39. > :59:45.my constituents, if they cannot vote yet. Simon Reevell, how will you
:59:46. > :59:50.vote? I don't think I will supported. It is wrong to smoke in a
:59:51. > :59:54.car with children, but how will we do it practically? A policeman sees
:59:55. > :00:00.someone smoking, pulls him over, denies it, what does he do? There
:00:01. > :00:06.are things we need to do through education. And I think we need to be
:00:07. > :00:12.certain we want to achieve this, but I just think the practical policing
:00:13. > :00:17.of this is almost impossible so I prefer to do it by education than by
:00:18. > :00:21.law. I don't think education has worked. I hear what you are saying
:00:22. > :00:26.but it sends out a clear signal to people that this is not acceptable.
:00:27. > :00:31.Children cannot make an informed choice. You cannot send out signals
:00:32. > :00:35.bylaw which is unenforceable. If you can in force in law, then use it,
:00:36. > :00:41.but practically, how would this work? We haven't had a proper go at
:00:42. > :00:46.educating people about this, and we need to make it more of an issue.
:00:47. > :00:57.Let's see if that works. I am doing nothing but condemning it. Denis
:00:58. > :01:00.MacShane, served six weeks of a six`month sentence. Do you think
:01:01. > :01:05.many people in Rotherham will be angry about that? I don't know if
:01:06. > :01:10.they will be angry. It is surprising it is only six weeks, but if that is
:01:11. > :01:14.what the judge thought was appropriate, then so be it. He very
:01:15. > :01:17.clearly has been punished for a crime so justice has been served. It
:01:18. > :01:24.is a matter of debate whether or not you think it is right he has got off
:01:25. > :01:28.lightly. He should have served half his sentence. Here's an example of
:01:29. > :01:33.people getting up sooner than he should. Chris has introduced a bill
:01:34. > :01:41.to keep people in prison for longer than they `` for longer. Let's talk
:01:42. > :01:48.about the fallout from the Anne McIntosh deselection. Was that a
:01:49. > :01:52.huge mistake by David Cameron, having an all`male front bench in
:01:53. > :01:57.Prime Minister 's questions? I don't think it is a mistake. There are men
:01:58. > :02:02.and women in politics and sometimes they sit down in a particular seat
:02:03. > :02:07.and sometimes they don't... There are fewer women in Parliament is so
:02:08. > :02:11.he's got slender pickings. Are we really suggesting that it would be
:02:12. > :02:15.better for politics if we think carefully we ask whom to sit where
:02:16. > :02:22.so it looks good or it doesn't look bad? Let's try to be serious about
:02:23. > :02:26.this. It is better for democracy to have a more representative chamber.
:02:27. > :02:31.That's got nothing to do with where they sit. Let's try and concentrate
:02:32. > :02:36.on what we are trying to do in politics and let's worry less about
:02:37. > :02:40.who is sitting where, or stuff like that. The fallout from the affair
:02:41. > :02:43.will continue for a while. Thank you both for your time today. Sarah
:02:44. > :02:45.Champion and Simon Reevell. Now, let's go back to Andrew Neil in
:02:46. > :02:55.London. a voice. Both of you, thank you so
:02:56. > :03:00.much. Andrew, it is back to you Can David Cameron get a grip on the
:03:01. > :03:04.floods? Can UKIP push the Conservatives into third place in
:03:05. > :03:07.the Wythenshawe by-election on Thursday? Is the speaker in the
:03:08. > :03:15.House of Commons in danger of overheating? All questions over the
:03:16. > :03:22.weekend. Let's look at the politics of the flooding. Let me show you a
:03:23. > :03:29.clip from Eric Pickles, the Communities Secretary, earlier on
:03:30. > :03:35.the BBC this morning. We perhaps relied too much on the Environment
:03:36. > :03:39.Agency's advice. I apologise. I apologise unreservedly and I am
:03:40. > :03:45.really sorry we took the advice of what we thought we were doing was
:03:46. > :03:48.the best. The Environment Agency is being hung out to dry by the
:03:49. > :03:54.Government and the Government has taken over the running of the
:03:55. > :03:59.environmental mess in the Somerset Levels. It is turning into a serious
:04:00. > :04:02.crisis by the Government and even more so for the people who are
:04:03. > :04:09.dealing with the flooding. There is no doubt that what has been revealed
:04:10. > :04:14.is it is not just about what the Government did or did not do six
:04:15. > :04:19.months ago. What is being exposed is an entire culture within the
:04:20. > :04:23.Environment Agency, fuelled often by European directives about dredging
:04:24. > :04:28.and all manner of other things, a culture grew up in which plants were
:04:29. > :04:31.put ahead of people if you like All of that is collapsing in very
:04:32. > :04:38.difficult circumstances by the Government and it is difficult for
:04:39. > :04:41.them to manage. Chris Smith would save the Environment Agency is
:04:42. > :04:45.acting under a law set by this Government and previous governments
:04:46. > :04:49.and the first priority is the protection of life, second property
:04:50. > :04:55.and third agricultural land and he is saying we are working within that
:04:56. > :04:59.framework. It is an edifying spectacle, they are setting up Lord
:05:00. > :05:03.Smith to be the fall guy. His term of office comes at the end of the
:05:04. > :05:08.summer and they will find something new. But the point Lord Smith is
:05:09. > :05:12.making is that dredging is important and it was a mistake not to dredge,
:05:13. > :05:17.but it is a bigger picture than that. I am no expert, but you need a
:05:18. > :05:24.whole skill solution that is looking not just bad dredging, but at the
:05:25. > :05:28.whole catchment area looking at the production of maize. It is harvested
:05:29. > :05:34.in autumn and then the water runs off the topsoil. You see the
:05:35. > :05:38.pictures of the flooding, it is all topsoil flooding through those
:05:39. > :05:42.towns. What you have got to have in the uplands is some land that can
:05:43. > :05:47.absorb that water and there are really big questions about the way
:05:48. > :05:51.we carry out farming. Chris Smith was meant to appear on the Andrew
:05:52. > :05:55.Marr show this morning, but pulled back at the last minute. There must
:05:56. > :05:59.be doubts as to whether he can survive to the summer. Where is the
:06:00. > :06:06.chief executive of the Environment Agency? I agree with Nick that Chris
:06:07. > :06:10.Smith has been setup in this situation. David Cameron went to the
:06:11. > :06:17.Somerset Levels on Friday for about half an hour, in and out, with no
:06:18. > :06:24.angry people shouting at him. You to a farm. It is agreed he has had good
:06:25. > :06:29.crisis. But we are seen as being a London media class who does not
:06:30. > :06:33.understand the countryside. You can imagine David Cameron in a pair of
:06:34. > :06:40.wellies. If this was happening in Guildford, it would not have dragged
:06:41. > :06:43.on for so long. Looe it is interesting how they are saying the
:06:44. > :06:49.Environment Agency has put words in front of everything else. The
:06:50. > :06:53.great-great-grandson of Queen Victoria thinks people should be
:06:54. > :06:57.sacked at the whim. He is talking about how the Environment Agency
:06:58. > :07:03.spent ?31 million on a bird sanctuary. It turns out the bird
:07:04. > :07:08.sanctuary was an attempt to put up a flood defence system for a village
:07:09. > :07:12.which has worked. That village has been saved. They compensated some
:07:13. > :07:17.farmers for the farmland they were not going to be able to farm and put
:07:18. > :07:26.a flood defence system further back to protect this village and then
:07:27. > :07:28.they built a bird sanctuary. It was not ?31 million to create a bird
:07:29. > :07:34.sanctuary, it was to save a village and it worked. But in 2008 the
:07:35. > :07:39.Environment Agency was talking about dynamiting every pumping agency
:07:40. > :07:45.There was a metropolitan mindset on the part of that agency. If it does
:07:46. > :07:51.what Owen Paterson, who is now off in an eye operation, suggested a
:07:52. > :07:56.plan to fix this, they will find a lot of what they want or need to do
:07:57. > :08:03.will be in contravention of European directives. The Wythenshawe
:08:04. > :08:09.by-election. There is no question Labour is going to win, probably
:08:10. > :08:14.incredibly convincingly, one poll showing 60% plus of the vote. It
:08:15. > :08:19.would be surprising if Labour was in any threat up there. The issue is,
:08:20. > :08:25.does UKIP beat the Tories and if so, by how much? The latest poll was
:08:26. > :08:32.showing it in second place as nip and tuck, but the feeling I have is
:08:33. > :08:35.UKIP will do better. And they have got a great local candidate. The
:08:36. > :08:40.Tories have not parachuted somebody in and they have got a local man in
:08:41. > :08:44.and that will help them. We have all been waiting to see if the Tories
:08:45. > :08:53.lose their head, but they might go chicken earlier than that. Will UKIP
:08:54. > :08:58.come second? It looks like that A poll this week showed that Labour is
:08:59. > :09:03.way ahead and UKIP possibly second. But it is an important by-election
:09:04. > :09:07.for UKIP. If they do well in the European elections, they should
:09:08. > :09:11.still be on a roll. They did really well in by-elections last year. If
:09:12. > :09:16.they do not do well, is it because they are not on payroll? Or in
:09:17. > :09:23.Manchester they have a fantastic leader of the council? Will UKIP
:09:24. > :09:27.come a good second? I think they will and if they do not, it might
:09:28. > :09:34.suggest Nigel Farage is losing its slightly. One thing to look out for
:09:35. > :09:39.is how little Labour are attacking UKIP. Their election strategy relies
:09:40. > :09:45.a lot on UKIP taking Tory votes But it could also take Labour votes
:09:46. > :09:50.Particularly in the north and we shall see. The results will be out
:09:51. > :09:57.on Thursday night. The Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bird ,
:09:58. > :10:02.his interventions have become more frequent and something was strange.
:10:03. > :10:10.Have a look. I am grateful to the honourable gentleman. Order, the
:10:11. > :10:15.Government Chief Whip has absolutely no business whatsoever shouting from
:10:16. > :10:20.a sedentary position. Order, the honourable gentleman will remain in
:10:21. > :10:28.the chamber. If we could tackle this problem. I say to the honourable
:10:29. > :10:32.member for Bridgwater, be quiet if you cannot be quiet, get out, it is
:10:33. > :10:51.rude, stupid and pompous and it needs to stop. Michael Gove. Order.
:10:52. > :10:57.You really... Order. You are a very over excitable individual. You need
:10:58. > :11:01.to write out 1000 times, I will behave myself at Prime Minister 's
:11:02. > :11:07.questions. He was talking to the Education Secretary and it is not
:11:08. > :11:16.1000 lines, it is 100 lines, at least it was in my day. Is he
:11:17. > :11:19.beginning to make a fool of himself? There was only one over excitable
:11:20. > :11:22.person there and that was the speaker and he is losing the
:11:23. > :11:27.confidence of the Conservative MPs, but he never had that in the first
:11:28. > :11:32.place. But he is an incredibly reforming speaker. He has this
:11:33. > :11:39.strange idea that Parliament should hold the Government to account. It
:11:40. > :11:44.will never catch on. It means very frequently there are urgent
:11:45. > :11:47.questions. The other day he called a backbench amendment on the
:11:48. > :11:52.deportation of foreign criminals. He could have found a way not to call
:11:53. > :11:57.that. He is a real reformer and the executive do not like that. That is
:11:58. > :12:05.true and he has allowed Parliament to flourish which has given us room
:12:06. > :12:09.to breathe at a time of a coalition Government when Parliament has more
:12:10. > :12:15.power. That is all that enough to overcome these increasingly mannered
:12:16. > :12:22.and some of them may be preplanned interventions? The last one was last
:12:23. > :12:30.week, and last week the speaker had a rather stressful week with the
:12:31. > :12:36.tabloids. Something is clearly up. I think it is a real shame. I think
:12:37. > :12:40.many of us when he was elected did not think he would make a great
:12:41. > :12:45.speaker and there are people like Douglas Carswell and Tory rebels who
:12:46. > :12:50.have said he is a fantastic speaker. He has given the Commons room to
:12:51. > :12:55.breathe and he has called on ministers to be held to account when
:12:56. > :12:59.they do not want to be. What do you think? He is seen as anti-government
:13:00. > :13:06.and he is pro-backbencher and that is what people do not like. People
:13:07. > :13:13.like Douglas Carswell are actually very strongly in support of him We
:13:14. > :13:17.carry the interventions every week on Prime Minister 's questions and
:13:18. > :13:21.we see them every week and they are getting a bit more eccentric. If I
:13:22. > :13:28.was having to keep that under control, I would be driven slowly
:13:29. > :13:32.mad. But his job is easier than mine. But if you look at his
:13:33. > :13:40.deputy, Eleanor Laing, she is very robust, but she is calm. Chap who
:13:41. > :13:49.does the budget is excellent. We are on throughout the week at midday on
:13:50. > :13:51.BBC Two. We will be back next Sunday at 11. If it is Sunday, it is the
:13:52. > :13:59.Sunday Politics.